SynthesisBMC public health2026
Interventions to prevent sexual harassment in universities: an umbrella review of systematic reviews.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis umbrella review analyzes existing literature on sexual harassment (SH) prevention in universities, including approaches that address SH within broader gender-based violence (GBV) forms. Conducted as part of the Uni4Equity project (CERV-2022-DAPHNE Programme), it aims to identify key trends, limitations and gaps in current prevention strategies.
methodA systematic search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO) was conducted to identify relevant systematic reviews evaluating interventions aimed at preventing SH (and related GBV forms) in university settings. Reviews were selected if they (1) demonstrated methodological requirements (e.g., detailed search strategies, pre-registered protocol), (2) were published in English between 2000 and 2024, (3) involved adult populations (students, staff).
resultsWe identified 17 systematic reviews meeting these criteria, whose methodological quality was rated as "critically low" according to the AMSTAR-2. Notably, none of the included reviews focused specifically on SH, and the available evidence derived from interventions targeting broader forms of GBV. The most consistent results came from bystander intervention programs, which effectively improved knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy, though they had limited impact on actual behavior change. Primary prevention programs addressing sexual and relationship violence had mixed results, while self-defense and risk reduction programs showed limited evidence of effectiveness. Social minorities, including LGBTQ + populations, were notably underrepresented in the studies reviewed.
conclusionsFindings highlight the need for comprehensive, campus-wide strategies that go beyond individual-focused interventions. These strategies should integrate education, policy reforms, awareness campaigns, and staff training. Moreover, they must be inclusive and intersectional, addressing the different layers of gender relations-social, institutional, and interpersonal. Methodological rigor is also essential to develop sustainable and culturally relevant solutions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.